[License-discuss] [License-review] For approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4)

[Rick Moen]

Quoting John Cowan (cowan at ccil.org):

> Perhaps you also remember when I submitted MS-PL and another MS
> license a few years before.  They were rejected on the perfectly
> correct process grounds that I could propose them but I couldn't
> change them if the OSI requested changes (they were too new to fit
> under the "legacy" category).  I accepted that and withdrew them, but
> I continued to maintain (in the face of attacks on Groklaw) that the
> licenses were nevertheless open source, and eventually OSI agreed with
> me.

FWIW, I dealt with the attacks on the Groklaw site by posting at length,
there, rebutting local critics, pointing out that Ms-PL and Ms-CL
(Microsoft Community License, the reciprocal one) were clearly
OSD-compliant on their merits, going through particulars repeatedly,
rejecting irrelevant objections as irrelevant, and noting the
irrelevancy of some stabs at argumentum ad hominem.  It took a few days,
but the point seemed to then get through.

To the best of my recollection, there were only three such 'Shared
Source' licences MSFT produced on that occasion (2007, launched into the
world by Mr. Bill Hilf via an OSCON keynote), the third one (Microsoft
Reference License, Ms-RL) omitting rights of modification and
redistribution, intended e.g., for reference copies of software libs --
obviously not open source.

-- 
Cheers,                          "Maybe the law ain’t perfect, but it’s the only
Rick Moen                        one we got, and without it we got nuthin'."
rick at linuxmafia.com              -- U.S. Deputy Marshal Bass Reeves, circa 1875
McQ! (4x80)